Coolerking, not double standards, I never said or assumed who did and didn't watch CC cricket but if you are trying to say that the young people who watch 'The Hundread', go to CC games then I would love to see them because when I go to CC I never really see anybody under 20.
Some years ago I had a long and friendly conversation with my dentist, who was Swedish and didn't understand cricket. Not only that, but he didn't understand how anybody could understand cricket. We concluded that you had to grow up with it, in which case it entered your soul and stayed there. That's how it is with me: I grew up watching what was then 3-day cricket and have loved it ever since. Sadly, kids today will not have that chance. Red ball cricket has been off accessible TV for donkey's years. The CC is played at times when families cannot attend - and even if they did they would find a poor welcome: try going to any of the major grounds (including Edgbaston) as a paying spectator at a CC game and see how long it takes you to find either a sandwich or a toilet that isn't locked.
But then you see how the players react. Ben Stokes and Jimmy Anderson have both recently lauded red ball cricket. Late last year I was listening to radio commentary on one of the games from our push for the title. An injured OH-D was on the mike and pointed out that Chris Woakes had chosen to play in this CC game when he could have been playing IPL "because this matters". Quite. I wish the ECB could see that.
Did anybody see the rain break discussion between messrs Strauss Atherton Ward re the future of English.
Sorry I have to say it, but what a lot of generalised dribble. Wish they’d invite real supporters on to ask what the rest of us like asked and answered.
Personally I don’t think they should have Strauss on if he is writing the report and the ECB has a lot to answer for not handling the introduction of the Hundred in an open and honest manner.
A lot of this is about what we want or expect of the game. And then contrast that with what a layperson might want from the game.
Watching this week's Grade Cricketer podcast quite an emotional rumination of the current discordant feel the game has and they raised a very pertinent poser.
Do we want cricket to be a game followed by millions at some surface or vague level and fed mostly by T20 franchise stuff that just washes over them?
Or do we prefer it to be a bit more niche and followed by a much smaller number of obsessives who are really into it and the sport has an idealistic and meritocratic global structure?
It's an interesting teaser.
Lots of funny comments too - bull pens made me chuckle
That is a really good question. How would the vote go if you asked people. Do you want a universal game of just T20 games where you might eventually get a crowd of 20000 to watch Germany v France or Spain v Italy or would you prefer Tests, 50 over and T20's where we just have about 15 countries playing to a good standard but still the rest of the world being baffled by the game in any format.
It's a very easy answer for me. I fell out of love with T20 almost as soon as it began and I now have no interest in it. You could have daily audiences of 50 million and I wouldn't care.
The point should be that it is not a binary choice. They are different games with different audiences. Why does hit-and-giggle have to monopolise the fixture list?
And here's the weekend we've been waiting for. Apart from another probable 3 or 4 day test match the only elite cricket being played in the next 4 days consists of double header 100 games played each day. Made this point before and will make it again. If momsnkidz have been enthused by the 100 what other cricket is available for them to watch during the remainder of the summer - answer none. We actually have the bizarre situation of our summer game taking a summer break. Ludicrous.
As well as spectators it's also the players as eloquently described here
Already one county's chief executive has said that he will have to make employees redundant if the number of first-class games is reduced, though the news of Friday morning suggest this is extremely unlikely for 2023, at least.
https://www.thecricketer.com/Topics/opinion/county_game_about_much_more_than_readying_england.html
Still can’t get over how the authorities would seek to exclude members of any county from ANY potential benefits of the hundred whilst suspending the county championship, just doesn’t make sense!
I posted many years ago on this forum's predessessor that cricketers need to realise they, like footballers, are in the entertainment business and as such should be performing at times that are attractive to the customer. You do not hear of football not being played at weekends or matches being arranged for an afternoon mid-week! Cricket should be played EVERY weekend and EVERY public holiday and in the heaight of the summer games should go on to 8 at night.
Last time we won the RL cup in 2016, the semi was played on August bank holiday Monday v Somerset. Today is bank holiday Monday and when are the semi's being played this year, yes, tomorrow when most people are back at work. I have always thought the same as you LE, that we should have cricket most days even if you stagger most fixtures. In 2014 I only watched cricket twice on a Saturday and both times it was because they were finals. It was either Kevin Howells or Pat Murphy who when interviewing a Scottish ECB member around this time, questioned them about lack of weekend cricket. Needless to say, if I could have put my hands through the radio and dragged the bloke out, I would have done so as his crass reply made my blood boil, suggesting that young people should be playing club cricket and not watching cricket and then contradicted himself by saying that only over 50's watched CC cricket at weekends - The very people who are mainly unlikely to be playing, with a few exceptions.
The weekends and bank holidays thing is self fulfilling. They'll probably give us a couple next year then point to sparse stands in April and go see?!??
When it really needs season after season to bed in and for locals to get used to relying on a game being on once a fortnight to actually work like it sort of did in the 80s 90s
It'll be the same going forward with the big gaping hole in middle of summer we've got now. There'll be the odd bone thrown to members and spectators but it'll be so hit and miss crowds initially will stay low so they'll say it proves CC belongs in April and October
When Scarborough festival and Colwyn Bay and a county festival at New Road early and late August will need 4-5 years regularity for the public to get used to them.
It saddens me to see that some counties just don't want to play championship cricket in August sad that certain counties like Somerset have been bought off and while there is this disunity we will keep being served up absolute dogs dinners of schedules just with less and less to watch and less and less games for players to hone their skills. I'd have thought some CC games in August would be the way to go to enable the retention of at least 14 CC games going forwards. Does anyone on here see any merit in playing four random three-day matches in a 5th format in August instead?
What husk of a season will we be left with if the ECB and the bought off counties like Somerset get their way? 1 home CC game every 5 or 6 weeks?
A major concern of mine if they went with local derby friendlies instead of proper championship matches is what would stop them abandoning matches before a ball is bowled as happened to yesterdays 2nd Xi match up at Durham?
If counties are concerned re: loss of lots of players to the undrd perhaps that idea from a few months ago about only awarding half points might for these matches be a better compromise.
Counties clash on playing Championship games during the Hundred
Elizabeth Ammon
Tuesday August 30 2022, 12.01am, The Times
Counties are in disagreement about how to fit first-class cricket into August alongside the Hundred.
_One of the main initial recommendations from Andrew Strauss’s review was that some red-ball cricket needs to take place in the middle of the summer. While there is general agreement among counties, player representatives and directors of cricket that some red-ball cricket needs to be played in August, there is a divide about whether this should be the county championship or stand-alone first-class cricket.
A handful of counties believe there should be two or three rounds of the County Championship in August even though about 90 county players would be missing because of the Hundred. But other counties believe that being shorn of some of their best players compromises the integrity of the competition.
One alternative suggestion is a series of stand-alone first-class matches perhaps played at outgrounds against a county’s their nearest rivals. A suggestion has been put forward by some counties that there should be two four -day matches in this period played as local derbies with a 50-over game played in the same week and that would help appease county members who are concerned about the lack of red-ball cricket played throughout the height of summer.
Strauss’s review, which was prompted by the dismal Ashes tour in the winter, has set out a number of key principles they believe should be looked at by the counties as part of a reform of the structure and schedule of county cricket. These include a slimmed down 50-Over Cup, which would be played at the beginning of the season in April and start of May, first-class cricket of some sort in August and a smaller top division of the County Championship to promote “best versus best”.
It had been hoped that changes would be decided on in the coming weeks with a view to implementing changes for the 2023 season. However, Strauss wrote in a blog for the ECB website last week that because of concerns from the counties about the tight timescales and ensuring they have time to consult with their members, it is likely there will be no change in the number of county championship matches for 2023.
Meetings between the counties and the ECB are taking place to come up with a number of options for the future schedule and it is still hoped that over the next two weeks some consensus will be found and a vote can take place at the end of September. Any changes to county cricket must have at least 12 of the 18 counties vote in favour and there is a feeling among some directors of cricket that a new schedule must be implemented for next year because the current one is having an impact both on quality and player welfare.
The counties have no say in The Hundred which is ring-fenced as a five-week tournament running through the school holidays so the key decisions they need make are:_
• How many teams should be in each division of the county championship?
• How many matches should each county play? There is a general agreement that there are too many days of cricket each season and that there needs to be a reduction which is likely to come from the championship as most counties want to retain 14 games in the Blast because this is one of their major sources of revenue. There is also agreement that the Blast needs to be played in June and July rather than starting in May as it did this year, which had an impact on ticket sales.
• What county cricket should be played in August while the Hundred is taking place? Both Strauss and Rob Key, England’s managing director, are adamant there must be some first-class cricket to help with preparation and development for the Test team.
All counties have committed to holding members consultation forums prior to any vote.
Another interesting perspective on the English cricketing calendar:
https://wisdenblog.wordpress.com/2022/03/02/the-thick-end-of-the-wedge/
If the majority of cricketers were recalled from their summer holidays then there would be ample time to play 2 CC games which would result in a more meaningful competition whereby every team plays each other home and away.
Would it be possible those in the 16.4 could also turn out for their county bearing in mind the 16.4 only lasts for 2 hours.
That was interesting cheers Gerry.
The 50 overs ODC has been shunted around the calendar the most (that seems set to continue) and it's also the format that has been chopped and changed the most too - number of matches is it a league, is it a cup or is it a bit of both?
Like a lot of the data we've been presented with though the question is what's it supposed to be informing us of a need for? I think the big take from that set of detailed charts is the gaps that exist in the season between any red ball cricket being played has become unsustainably too large especially for a country like England - sure to form there's a set of fixtures Monday during which 4 counties don't even get to play - and sure enough the weather and temperatures and quality of daylight has deteriorated just in time for this resumption
Say they do fill August with 3-4 championship games in 2023 and say they do go onto reduce the total number of games to 10 from 2024. I've asked it before but what on earth will the players be doing through May, June & July? All it will do is move that gaping hole we've suffered this August without any red ball cricket to another 5-6 week period earlier in the season. That cannot be allowed to happen. 14 CC rounds of cricket with all 18 counties playing each and every round is surely not beyond the schedulers considering there were 16 rounds allocated for it this year
I'd be in favour of playing first class cricket in August but I think playing friendlies is the worst idea sine the hundred. It would have to be CC. I also think a CC reverse draft would be a good idea, identify the 150 best four day players in the country and exclude them from the hundred draft and add an ECB supplement to their county salary. So say Sam Hain, who has realistic England aspirations in the two longer formats, would play CC for Warwickshire (and get a few £ in his Christmas stocking) &, say, Ethan Brooks, would go to Welsh Fire. I don't even think the hundred would lose much by the deal as I don't suppose many people are making a decision to go to a 100 game just to see Sam.
I had an idea similar to a reverse draft on on the other thread: Not reduce the amount of cricket in the summer but reduce the load per player by having three rounds of CC cricket in August as development. It would need a quota of a certain number of players under the age of xx or of with fewer than yy first class appearances. Test players could play alongside them to prepare for internationals. I don't see how ECB will ever square the problem of playing less cricket but maintaining the fans preference of no less 50 over and CC cricket without this or the reverse draft suggestion.
Any other suggestions or speculation about what happens?
https://youtu.be/cRjfdU_dodI
Andrew Cornish discussed ECB's high performance review on a Middlesex vlog
Seems calm and measured
There was also I thought a really detailed response to the Strauss review earlier this week by 'Radlett Ronnie' on the Middlesex forum I thought worth pasting here.
I have had the chance to have a close look at the Strauss document and have a few thoughts about some of it.
• The Review wants England to be at or near the top of all three international formats. Yet is fails to consider the impact of the 100 on those three formats. The Review is therefore deeply flawed. It assumes that the Hundred is “the best v the best” (without any evidence) and that this is the one element of the English game that does not need any reconsideration.
• The Review is clearly not finished. There is a list of 7 unanswered questions on Page 36 . It is also clear that there has been some last minute rethinking. The plan was for change in 2023. Information was to be published on 9 September with a vote on 20 Sep. Hence counties have been hastily arranging EGMs and other consultation exercises. This was to treat the counties with complete disrespect. Now, something seems to have changed. More below.
• The jargon is horrible, “thought leaders”… “performance summit”… “aligned, aspirational England environment”. This sort of language usually suggests an underlying lack of substance.
• Some ideas are in direct opposition to recent ECB policies: smaller Championship Division 1, recently enlarged to 10, from 8; North v South abroad pre-season, tried and recently abandoned by the ECB; the lack of bowling for spinners in first class cricket but scheduling most of that in late Spring and early Autumn; more Lions games, when the most recent was used as a practice match, not even first class.
• The Review stresses that the amount of cricket played in England is higher than elsewhere. There is no consideration of the fact that more cricket means more opportunities for more cricketers, and that cuts in the number of games will mean cuts in playing staffs. In any case, the issue is the scheduling not the number of days’ cricket. Toby Roland-Jones is currently on a period which could mean more than seven weeks without any cricket. Also largely ignored is the fact that the elite players are protected from over-playing by central contracts. Most significantly of all, it ignores the fact that there has been a huge increase in the number of England games. It really is rich for an ECB-commissioned report to preach cutting county games while the ECB greatly increases international fixtures.
• Comparisons with other countries are selective in the Review. It ignores, for instance, the standard of Australian club cricket and the vast Indian population. There is no comparison of games lost to weather in different countries. It does not address, for instance, the fact that Australian states do not play a second short-form competition on top of The Big Bash.
• There is a bland assumption that, in England, less will be better. This flies in the face of evidence from other skills-based activities. Nowhere is there consideration of the possible impact of fewer games on the validity, integrity and value of domestic competitions, especially the championship. Nowhere is there consideration of the impact of fewer games on the use of outgrounds such as Scarborough, Cheltenham or Chesterfield, where the game is taken to venues away from county centres. Nowhere is there consideration of what fewer matches will do for county memberships and wider enthusiasm for the game beyond its shortest versions. Yet there is vague reference to red ball cricket in August.
The Review raises some valid questions. Now that there is a year's delay to any implementation of its implications, is there now any value in rushed consultations? And what form is the vote by county chairs on Sep 20 to take in the light of the extra time now available to consider the Review properly?